Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
18 yr old gets 10 years in prison for having sex with a 15 yr old...
- Thread starter hooch
- Start date
the nature boy
New member
Good news.
Yeah, what the fuck was he talking about? And what INJURY was he referring to that would cause a wedding to be canceled?ChewYxRage said:
starfish said:
No can do starfish; no suit can be brought as it was not mauliicious prosectuion.
The state didn't do anything illegal or outside the lines - they just aggressively enforced a stupid law.
Since the law was onthe books along with mandatory sentencing, there is no legal recourse.
Sad.
Just an educated guess here: he played football, is black, and probably had an attitude because of it. If the shit about him flashing a girl in class and sticking his hand down some girls pants at school was true, then I doubt this guy knows the meaning of consensual sex, and if he did, he obviously doesn't know the meaning of "gentle", or "compassionate", since he ripped her apart. 
hanselthecaretaker said:Just an educated guess here: he played football, is black, and probably had an attitude because of it. If the shit about him flashing a girl in class and sticking his hand down some girls pants at school was true, then I doubt this guy knows the meaning of consensual sex, and if he did, he obviously doesn't know the meaning of "gentle", or "compassionate", since he ripped her apart.
You do realize that vaginal tearing can happen during consensual sex, right?
Update: he has a scholarship offer from Middle Tennessee State now.
http://www.helpmarcus.com/index.htm
Last edited:
MAX 300
New member
Has anyone seen this on Oprah?
I watched this case on Oprah yesterday, only because the subject interested me.
Oprah was trying to be impartial, but she ended up giving Dixon and his family a lot more air time than the girl.
Before the show I believed that Dixon got done for having sex with a white girl, but after the show and after listening to the girl I started believing her side more, I think the jury got it wrong.
Dixon claimed, on the show, that the girl was promiscuous that she had been flirting with him and asked him to come to the trailor. He basically called her a slut.
But he never took the stand and said those things in court, only on TV. If he had taken the stand in court, prosecutors could have quizzed him about his own history of sexual battery.
As the show went, only the girls alleged sexual history was brought into question. Oprah never asked Dixon about his, the issue of Dixons past sexual offences was never brought up.
The girl had injuries, vaginal and thigh bruising, consistent with either being raped or being a virgin.
That contradicts what Dixon said about her being a slut. If she was a virgin then she wouldn't be a slut who agreed to quicky with him in a trailor.
The whole idea of this 15 year old girl being a promiscuous little ho who wanted to screw Dixon, got found out and then cried rape doesn't hold up to that evidence.
I believe her, Dixon should be doing more than 10 years for rape.
As a side not: Having consensual sex with a minor should not be a crime, most girl first have sex at age 14 and it's consensual most of the time.
The law that Dixon got into jail for is wrong, but to me he's still a rapist even if the jury was too blind to see it.
I watched this case on Oprah yesterday, only because the subject interested me.
Oprah was trying to be impartial, but she ended up giving Dixon and his family a lot more air time than the girl.
Before the show I believed that Dixon got done for having sex with a white girl, but after the show and after listening to the girl I started believing her side more, I think the jury got it wrong.
Dixon claimed, on the show, that the girl was promiscuous that she had been flirting with him and asked him to come to the trailor. He basically called her a slut.
But he never took the stand and said those things in court, only on TV. If he had taken the stand in court, prosecutors could have quizzed him about his own history of sexual battery.
As the show went, only the girls alleged sexual history was brought into question. Oprah never asked Dixon about his, the issue of Dixons past sexual offences was never brought up.
The girl had injuries, vaginal and thigh bruising, consistent with either being raped or being a virgin.
That contradicts what Dixon said about her being a slut. If she was a virgin then she wouldn't be a slut who agreed to quicky with him in a trailor.
The whole idea of this 15 year old girl being a promiscuous little ho who wanted to screw Dixon, got found out and then cried rape doesn't hold up to that evidence.
I believe her, Dixon should be doing more than 10 years for rape.
As a side not: Having consensual sex with a minor should not be a crime, most girl first have sex at age 14 and it's consensual most of the time.
The law that Dixon got into jail for is wrong, but to me he's still a rapist even if the jury was too blind to see it.
Robert Jan
New member
So what should the statutory rape law be like? ONe could convinve a 10 year old to have sex with them. its still rape-abuse.
Do you guys believe the age to be legal should be lowered? Then to what age?
14? Is it really ok for 30something year old men to be having sex with 14 year olds?
Maybe it is i dont know.
Do you guys believe the age to be legal should be lowered? Then to what age?
14? Is it really ok for 30something year old men to be having sex with 14 year olds?
Maybe it is i dont know.
MAX 300
New member
Stat rape law is complicated.
Setting an age for when a person is ready to consent to sex is just very difficult.
But setting it unrealistically high, and 16 is very unrealistic as most people have sex prior to that, is not the answer.
Whether or not a sexual relationship is ok or acceptable depends on many factors.
Ask a bunch of soccer mums if adult men and their 16 year old daughters should be allowed to have sex, most of them will probably scream child abuse, even though it's legal. I think it matters who is in the relationship, what the relationship is built on - and I think 14 would be a lot more realistic as an age of consent.
Setting an age for when a person is ready to consent to sex is just very difficult.
But setting it unrealistically high, and 16 is very unrealistic as most people have sex prior to that, is not the answer.
Whether or not a sexual relationship is ok or acceptable depends on many factors.
Ask a bunch of soccer mums if adult men and their 16 year old daughters should be allowed to have sex, most of them will probably scream child abuse, even though it's legal. I think it matters who is in the relationship, what the relationship is built on - and I think 14 would be a lot more realistic as an age of consent.
Similar threads
